[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Haskell purity and printing

Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Haskell purity and printing
From: "Nicolas Frisby"
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:17:29 -0600
> Note that your h does not differentiate between f and g (in fact, it
> does not investigate them at all), the only thing you can do with f,
> g, (h f), and (g f) is apply them. Accordingly, it's a fine Haskell
> definition.

Errr... (h g), not (g f)
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>